EDITORIAL: Public role in education reform is murky

For legislation that is supposed to be all about improving the governance of the Nova Scotia school system, in a way that is supposed to deliver better and more consistent education, the McNeil government’s Bill 72 is not very enlightening on just how the new system will be governed and held accountable to the public.

And the rushed legislature handling of the bill hasn’t got to the heart of this issue, either. Why is the new bureaucrat-dominated governance model better? And what real involvement will parents and communities have?

The bill enacts the government’s grand gesture — axing the seven English-language regional school boards, while preserving the Acadian board, an inconsistency that probably reflects a hard political reality.

Nova Scotia’s francophones would rightly mount a constitutional challenge if government tried to eliminate the French-education board for which they fought so hard. And they would surely win, as they have done before when governments undermined their Charter rights.

Other Nova Scotians seem less concerned about losing elected boards. Maybe they just accept the argument in the Glaze report that boards have performed poorly and attract few voters in elections — though the legislature and municipal councils afford many examples, too, of bickering and poor judgment. Or perhaps people blame the boards for uneven results in education across the province.

But public accountability and openness play a key role in achieving better results. And Bill 72 is weak in these areas. In the English system, the governance structure will be seven regional directors (the former superintendents) running the old school board offices, appointed by the minister of education and reporting to the deputy minister. Only one of these officials, the minister, is elected, as an MLA. And he or she is appointed minister by the premier.

Public participation is supposed to come from a 15-member Provincial Advisory Council (PAC) and from advisory councils for a single school or a group of schools.

PAC members are appointed by the minister for a maximum of two two-year terms, except for three mandatory members chosen by the Acadian board, the Council on Mi’kmaq Education and the Council on African-Canadian Education. The minister appoints members of the Mi’kmaq and African-Canadian councils, too.

The minister sets terms of reference for the PAC and chooses its chairperson. It can only advise — the bill says on local or regional matters and on educational matters it wishes to raise or those referred to it by the minister.

How the school councils are set up and what they can do has been left to regulations, i.e., the minister. Vaguely, the bill says they are to “assist” regional offices to ensure schools meet community needs and to perform “other functions” directed by regulations, the minister or the regional director.

Again, the role is advisory only. And, as with the PAC, it’s hard to believe that the governing authority, the department, can be held very accountable by bodies appointed by the minister to advise the minister in ways and on matters determined by the minister.

The department has said school councils will be consulted on an expanded role and given funding to respond to school priorities. But the minister also said last week that funding will be modest. And the legislation tells us to wait for regulations on the “composition and powers and duties” of school councils.

So, really, citizen participation through what Glaze called “vibrant School Advisory Councils” with “enhanced influence” has either not been clearly thought through or is overblown rhetoric. If the legislation is about better governance, it’s not credible to leave out details that tell us whether there is any substance to the public’s role.

Education consultant Paul Bennett, who generally supports the bill, told the law amendments committee he believes the public needs stronger representation than regional directors can provide. He would like to see school advisory councils play a local governing role to “decentralize decision-making, restore democratic accountability and we’ll all be further ahead.” Surely there is a good case for real community involvement in school decisions. And surely the government should be clearly spelling that out.